Draft board for QB's-OT's-WR's

[40yrpatsfan]

Here's a visual of the first 2+ rounds of the draft, 1-68, with the approximate spots where QB's (yellow), OT's (green), and WR's/TE's (tan) will be taken. It shows there's a cliff for getting a QB at about 15 (till 40), and a cliff for getting a WR/TE at about 8 (till 25). The OT's are pretty nicely spread out from 6 through 24 for the top tier, then 30-60 for the second tier. We pick at 3, 34, and 68, and somehow I hope we can improve those 2nd and 3rd picks.

 

[KCSVEN]

Here's a visual of the first 2+ rounds of the draft, 1-68, with the approximate spots where QB's (yellow), OT's (green), and WR's/TE's (tan) will be taken. It shows there's a cliff for getting a QB at about 15 (till 40), and a cliff for getting a WR/TE at about 8 (till 25). The OT's are pretty nicely spread out from 6 through 24 for the top tier, then 30-60 for the second tier. We pick at 3, 34, and 68, and somehow I hope we can improve those 2nd and 3rd picks.
View attachment 56777

Interesting, is this based on multiple mock drafts or some other formula?

 

[40yrpatsfan]

Interesting, is this based on multiple mock drafts or some other formula?

it was eyeballing several mocks and big boards, so sort of an average slotting. Where I think this is useful is if mocking a trade down to manufacture some additional picks - how might an extra 2nd rounder under 45 affect our ability to move up from 34 and/or 68 (and given that we'd then be picking lower than #3 in r1)? How far up to we have to move to get the best combination of players?

In our ideal draft, we land a QB, an OT, and a WR that are all studs. I'm not sure we can accomplish that with picks 3-34-68, but maybe we can with picks 8-24-58 or something like that.

 

[patsfanfromoversea]

Here's a visual of the first 2+ rounds of the draft, 1-68, with the approximate spots where QB's (yellow), OT's (green), and WR's/TE's (tan) will be taken. It shows there's a cliff for getting a QB at about 15 (till 40), and a cliff for getting a WR/TE at about 8 (till 25). The OT's are pretty nicely spread out from 6 through 24 for the top tier, then 30-60 for the second tier. We pick at 3, 34, and 68, and somehow I hope we can improve those 2nd and 3rd picks.
View attachment 56777

Looking at this for OT makes me want to trade up from 34 for an OT

 

[Ivan]

Here's a visual of the first 2+ rounds of the draft, 1-68, with the approximate spots where QB's (yellow), OT's (green), and WR's/TE's (tan) will be taken. It shows there's a cliff for getting a QB at about 15 (till 40), and a cliff for getting a WR/TE at about 8 (till 25). The OT's are pretty nicely spread out from 6 through 24 for the top tier, then 30-60 for the second tier. We pick at 3, 34, and 68, and somehow I hope we can improve those 2nd and 3rd picks.
View attachment 56777

The Patriots got lucky. A top 3 pick with 3 really good QB prospects. The first 2 rounds really strong at Tackle. And a WR class that runs 25-30 deep in good prospects. We will learn a lot about this front office this offseason, because it’s been teed up for them with a boatload of free agent $$$$, and a draft that tailored to their most pressing needs.

 

[40yrpatsfan]

The Patriots got lucky. A top 3 pick with 3 really good QB prospects. The first 2 rounds really strong at Tackle. And a WR class that runs 25-30 deep in good prospects. We will learn a lot about this front office this offseason, because it’s been teed up for them with a boatload of free agent $$$$, and a draft that tailored to their most pressing needs.

Yes and no. We need studs at QB, WR, and LT, but we're only guaranteed 2 of those at #3 (QB) and #34 (WR). OT is the problem - we'd need to pick in the 20's to get a top shelf LT.

otoh, if we can trade down from 3 (to say 6-10) and still get an acceptable answer at QB, the extra choices we pick up will let us get studs at all 3 positions.

 

[borisman]

We likely need to trade up into 1st round to get that LT (a RT could be had with our 2nd rounder) but finding a trade partner will be hard. Not sure if signing Onwenu would come with an understanding he'll play RT.
There will be less talented but still productive WR's in the 3rd and 4th rounds, like Malachi Corley, Roman Wilson, James Thrash, Ricky Pearsall, Javon Baker, etc. But as stated we need to upgrade speed on defense as well, so as much help as we need on offense we can't overlook our defense if the right player is there in the 3rd round. We could also try to trade back up into the 3rd if said player is still available.

 

[upstater1]

The problem with taking a tackle in this draft is that a lot of the top tackles are RTs.

You don't want Fautanu or Barton playing LT for you.

 

[Ivan]

Yes and no. We need studs at QB, WR, and LT, but we're only guaranteed 2 of those at #3 (QB) and #34 (WR). OT is the problem - we'd need to pick in the 20's to get a top shelf LT.

otoh, if we can trade down from 3 (to say 6-10) and still get an acceptable answer at QB, the extra choices we pick up will let us get studs at all 3 positions.

I think that’s going to change. The first half of the first round is so offense heavy that I think you will see defenders rising up draft boards, and pushing the OL, like Guyton, Mims, and Latham down to late first and early second round. The best case scenario for me is QB at 3, OT, at # 34, then package a 3rd with a 3rd next year to move up in the second round for one of the many very good WR prospects. .

 

[Ivan]

The problem with taking a tackle in this draft is that a lot of the top tackles are RTs.

You don't want Fautanu or Barton playing LT for you.

Guyton is my favorite in the 2nd half of the 1st round, and even though he played RT he was protecting the blind side of their left handed QB.

 

[Ivan]

Yes and no. We need studs at QB, WR, and LT, but we're only guaranteed 2 of those at #3 (QB) and #34 (WR). OT is the problem - we'd need to pick in the 20's to get a top shelf LT.

otoh, if we can trade down from 3 (to say 6-10) and still get an acceptable answer at QB, the extra choices we pick up will let us get studs at all 3 positions.

I have zero interest in trading out of 3. Imo it’s the worst offseason move they can make, and it will set them back years if they do it. I don’t see any other way they can get a franchise QB, and there is nothing more useless than a mediocre QB.

 

[Jim Beankie]

This is what I use, for better or worse:

2024 Consensus Mock Draft | NFL Mock Draft Database

The 2024 Consensus NFL Mock Draft from NFL Mock Draft Database. We've compiled all featured mocks into a single popular 1st round mock draft.

www.nflmockdraftdatabase.com

 

[Ivan]

The problem with taking a tackle in this draft is that a lot of the top tackles are RTs.

You don't want Fautanu or Barton playing LT for you.

If they re-sign Onwenu they will only be looking for a LT, and if they have to they can sign a guy like Tyson Smith to a short term deal, and then draft a tackle with their second pick that may take season to develop, both then take over the position. They could get Guyton, Morgan, or maybe even Amegadjie to fill that role. And with Amegadjie they should be able to go WR at 34 and then get him at the top of round 3.

 

[Ivan]

This is what I use, for better or worse:

2024 Consensus Mock Draft | NFL Mock Draft Database

The 2024 Consensus NFL Mock Draft from NFL Mock Draft Database. We've compiled all featured mocks into a single popular 1st round mock draft.

www.nflmockdraftdatabase.com

Looks pretty sound, but Bowers won’t go at 5 because the price tag is too high for a TE. 9-15 seems more likely to me.

 

[Jim Beankie]

Looks pretty sound, but Bowers won’t go at 5 because the price tag is too high for a TE. 9-15 seems more likely to me.

Yeah that jumped out at me as well.